1. Field of Invention
The present invention relates to the internet and computer network-based online information space where research across a multiplicity of subjects is conducted. More particularly, the invention relates to a method and system for research through simultaneous interactive comparison and contrasting of a multiplicity of subjects within predefined and dynamic subject contexts using a Compare-Contrast Console, a Configure-Filter-Search Console, a Custom-Research Console, and a Universal Research Framework. The method is performed using the system, and the system is embodied in computer software stored on and accessible from a computer-readable storage medium.
2. Discussion of the Related Art
Research is a methodical process of investigation aimed at discovering, interpreting, and understanding information. This intellectual investigation produces a greater knowledge of events, behaviors, theories, and laws and makes practical applications possible. Any research follows a structured process, which involves certain fundamental steps, like topic formation, hypothesis, data gathering, data analysis and conclusion. The context of the present invention is improving research during the data gathering, data analysis, and conclusion stages of the research process.
People understand subjects that are known or subjects similar to those that are known. Similar experiences reinforce the lessons of those experiences. Dissimilar experiences that contradict prior experiences tend to require new ways of thinking. Therefore, comparing and contrasting unfamiliar subjects with familiar subjects is one of the most important techniques of human learning. In a typical comparison-contrast situation, people either compare one subject to another subject, which is similar to it, or contrast it to a subject that is different from it, or most frequently, do both comparison and contrasting. Compare-Contrast is one of the important methods used in research for data analysis and conclusion.
The compare-contrast method of research, applied to a multiplicity of subjects, is conducted against specific attributes of subjects and subject contexts in order to study, simulate, understand, learn, evaluate, analyze, review, reflect, judge, oppose, conclude, and decide among the chosen subjects.
The first criterion for a comparison-contrast method is that the subjects chosen should make sense for comparison. When two subjects are being compared, one list of attributes concerning one subject cannot be compared with a completely different list of attributes concerning the second subject. The ground for comparison needs to be defined as to why the subjects are chosen for comparison and why the choice is intentional and meaningful. In addition, it is important to establish a common frame of reference for comparison, which is the context within which the two or more subjects are being compared. For example, apples and oranges can be compared against their ‘nutritious value’ as a frame of reference.
Currently users conducting research through comparison-contrast are predominantly using tedious offline methods, which are time consuming. There are four major steps involved in the current comparison-contrast process.
The first step of the process is to define the subjects that are to be compared and contrasted. Either the user knows which subjects to compare or the user performs a preliminary search to find the subjects to be compared within a specific subject context. Users conduct offline and online searches during this phase to identify the specific subjects for comparison within the specific subject context.
The second step involves defining the attributes for the chosen subject context. These attributes establish the frame of reference for comparison and are derived through study of the individual subjects and deducing the common attributes among the subjects, which is again mostly an offline activity.
The third step involves compiling individual values for each subject against each of the defined attributes. The subjects and the attributes form the axes of a matrix where the values for each subject-attribute pair are collated into the corresponding individual cells of the matrix. Again, this step of the process is typically conducted using offline compilation methods.
The fourth step involves analyzing the comparison-contrast research findings, deducing the similarities and differences, which again is an offline activity.
While there are some online solutions for performing research, currently there are no effective universal internet and computer network-based online solutions for simultaneously researching a multiplicity of subjects through comparison and contrast methods. Detailed information about individual subjects is available in abundance across the internet information space, mostly existing in hierarchical relationship structures. However, there are no means for the internet user to collate such available information into a common platform where it can be compared and contrasted.
The closest and most widely used related art in the comparison research domain is that found on various online shopping comparison websites. There are a number of competitive websites, which compare the shopping prices of individual items across different vendors. Websites such as http://www.pricegrabber.com, http://www.bizrate.com, http://www.kayak.com, http://www.shopping.com, and http://www.sidestep.com help users compare prices of individual items across different vendors within related products lines. Such websites also offer features for side-by-side product comparisons against product attributes. The major limitation of such related art is that these websites only compare limited products that are ready for purchase against similar products. An infinite number of other items in an infinite number of other subject areas cannot be compared and contrasted by these methods.
Another type of related art comprises the individual product company web sites such as http://www.sonystyle.com. These types of website enable the user to configure product requirements to dynamically narrow search results. The major limitation of such related art is that users can compare only a single manufacturer's products, and again an infinite number of other items in an infinite number of other subject areas are ignored.
Another related art specific to making research easier for the user is found on the Grokker website, http://www.grokker.com. This art uses a federated search strategy to access multiple databases with a single query. The topically organized list of search results makes research much easier and the mind map-based visual representation of available information helps the user reach the search results quickly. This related art, however, does not enable users to conduct research simultaneously on multiple subjects through comparison and contrast methods. In addition, it has the limitation of a fixed list of subject topics based on a search database, and users do not have the flexibility to add attributes of their own choosing on which to search.
Thus, it is evident that there is a major need for an online research solution using the compare-contrast method, which enables the user to conduct research through compare-contrast methods in order to study, simulate, understand, learn, evaluate, analyze, review, reflect, judge, oppose, conclude, and decide among desired subjects in an efficient and streamlined manner.
It is therefore an objective of the present invention to provide a research solution utilizing the comparison-contrast method, which enables users to simultaneously compare and contrast attributes of a multiplicity of subjects within specific subject contexts.
It is a further objective of the present invention to provide a research solution that enables users to search within a multiplicity of subjects against a specific set of attribute-value configurations to arrive at an appropriate set of subjects for comparison-contrast research.
It is yet a further objective of the present invention to provide a custom research solution that enables users to conduct compare-contrast of subjects through highly customizable subject-attribute combination searches across various subject-attribute pairs, to arrive at an efficient and organized collection of research data for further comparison-contrast research.
It is yet a further objective of the present invention to provide a Universal Research Framework that can be embedded within any externally managed information system, which enables the user to perform the above three methods of comparison-contrast, configuration-searching, and custom researching against subjects under predefined and dynamic subject contexts for research purposes.
Other objectives of this invention will be evident from the following disclosure.